Talk:Gray-Nicolls

Added section
I added a history section. Not sure what to do with the previous text. --58.179.70.59 01:15, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Gray Nicolls logo.png
Image:Gray Nicolls logo.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 06:18, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Refs
The article needs Refs or it should be deleted. --94.102.155.98 (talk) 20:10, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Endorsements
Without proper references this whole section is bordering on SPAM and should not be included. Such claims must be cited or it could be libellous. --136.173.162.129 (talk) 12:28, 24 February 2009 (UTC)


 * As with other sporting goods manufacturers (e.g. Nike, Adidas, etc.), endorsement deals with high profile international sports stars are notable and worthy of inclusion in the article. Sourcing can be difficult, as only the most prominent players will have their deals covered in the mainstream press, but that is not reason to discard everything. It is neither spam, not libellous. The only problem is that the company website is the only possible source for a full list or endorsement deals. wjemather bigissue 13:02, 24 February 2009 (UTC)


 * I understand, but verifiability is one of the 5 pillars of Wikipedia, and we cannot use the names of prominent public figures in relation to an article without reliable sources (i.e. WP:BLP). --136.173.162.129 (talk) 13:35, 24 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Strong agreement with the IP. There's no reason why this or any article should include a list of names which cannot be verified.  I see aspects of WP:ADVERTISING here also.  WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS is a poor excuse.  The lists have been tagged as needing sources for over 2 years now and the burden of proof is on those who wish the lists to remain.  In the meantime, lists removed.  Moondyne (talk) 14:05, 23 April 2011 (UTC)